How do fans feel about the possibility that Krypton gets destroyed in a Civil War instead of blowing up naturally ? (or, getting destroyed because their Sun - Rao went Supernova ?)

Does it count as significant alteration of mythos ? would that cause backlash ?

I don't think so. As long as the effect of "kid has no planet left, he grows up on Earth with powers" is achieved, I don't think it matters how it happens. Plus, a civil war lends itself to AKSHUN! No one's gonna complain after they see those great-looking Kryptonian battles (I assume).

The reason why the book worked so well for me is because of the narration, you could see what each character felt and they were all so human despite their weird circumstances, it gave the reader something to hold on to, something to relate to. I also love the theme of the book how in order to move forward as a person or as a civilization you always need to screw someone over, which explained the constant cycle of oppression and revolution, but if you don't have something to hold on to, the plot becomes ponderous and peachy.

The film didn't have that narration or "stream of consciousness", so you're just left with cold plot.

Then again I did see it once and saw only a boring long mess...maybe I just need to watch it again with lowered expectations.

hate is such a strong word for such a big creative risk. i understand when someone hates comicbook movies. those are expensive movies done by the numbers. i understand when you are a fan of a book.

but what they did couldnt be done by noone else. even if you dont like it you have to respect the balls that they had(plus Tykwer) to do it.

and to quote Pa Kent. '' the world is not ready for a Wachowski comicbook movie''

Sorry but that is B.S. I don't have to respect any movie because of it's so called ambitions. I can't watch good intentions. I have zero respect for Cloud Atlas and find the movie to be just as pathetic as any film that I dislike regardless of genre. I don't hate it because it doesn't deserve my hate but I do find it laughably bad.

maybe in this scene, Jor-El is brought before the council to explain the circumstances around his son's natural conception.

and maybe this is where he gives the "What if a child dreamed of becoming something other than what society had intended. What if a child aspired to something greater" speech.

All these theories are making the destruction of Krypton sound irrelevant, like it's only included to stay true to the mythos and doesn't have any real bearing on the plot and isn't the reason Kal-El is sent to Earth. And we know now that Krypton is destroyed in a natural disaster, according to Empire.

All these theories are making the destruction of Krypton sound irrelevant, like it's only included to stay true to the mythos and doesn't have any real bearing on the plot and isn't the reason Kal-El is sent to Earth. And we know now that Krypton is destroyed in a natural disaster, according to Empire.

No, I think they are destroying Krypton so Kal-El is "alone", outside of Zod and co. Far from irrelevant.

__________________"You've failed, Your Highness. I am a Jedi, like my father before me."